I am the all mighty

I created the universe, and u all are a bunch of blind sheeps.

According to my beliefs: I am god.

Now prove me wrong.

Yes, and I as a believer, presuppose your existence. Therefore, all counter arguments attempting to disprove or even question your existence are irrelevant.

Here is the argument:

1) There are things that are true.
2) God exists.
3) Therefore, it is true that God exists.

End of story.

Is that real unleashed on tunder3 account? or is tunder3 trying to be funny.

Scritto da Tundy, 03.07.2014 at 18:06

I created the universe, and u all are a bunch of blind sheeps.

According to my beliefs: I am god.

Now prove me wrong.

According to my beliefs:I'm obi-wan kenobi

Scritto da tophat, 03.07.2014 at 18:20

Yes, and I as a believer, presuppose your existence. Therefore, all counter arguments attempting to disprove or even question your existence are irrelevant.

Here is the argument:

1) There are things that are true.
2) God exists.
3) Therefore, it is true that God exists.

End of story.

I like puppies? wanna break that down for me Anarchist lel

Scritto da Permamuted, 03.07.2014 at 19:12

Is that real unleashed on tunder3 account? or is tunder3 trying to be funny.

NO INSULTS!
[Edited by ≈CD]

These jokes from tunder about unleashed are ridiculess

I will side with homosexuality to defeat religion

Some Lutheran cleric support same sex marriage and gay rights!
Actually, the problem is not religion, but religious fundamentalism and mafia-like "religious" institutions.

Scritto da Columna Durruti, 05.07.2014 at 07:21

Some Lutheran cleric support same sex marriage and gay rights!
Actually, the problem is not religion, but religious fundamentalism and mafia-like "religious" institutions.

The problem IS religion. Without people holding up these false ideas, there would be no institutions or fundamnetalism.

If you want to treat a problem, don't treat the symptoms but the root cause.

balance in all things in life must be found because extremities in both ways lead to shit.

Not having idiotic imaginary friends is not an extremity. It's called mental health, a very foreign concept to the population of this planet.

Well glad you said that ...recently i read this scientific article about this part of the brain that is responsible for ..."belief" or "faith" whatever you call it.

And it says that this part of the brain when triggered ...by praying etc. is actually triggering happines and sense of fullfillnes in a person ...so the article argues about the thing, are people without any belief in something higher actually the ones who are "sick" considering that part of their brain doesnt work ...or have they actually evolved, meaning that faith or god are not necessary to a modern man.

I think having faith in something greater then your self, in term of some bigger meaning of existence is good for a person ...but having blind faith in religious truths and worse being a fanatic is idiotic.

A false sense of happiness doesn't impress me.

I like to have faith in myself, not something greater than myself. As soon as I saw my illusions for what they are and I let them go, a sense of certainty and control replaced it. As if what happens to me next is in my total control. It was awesome.

Many times I feel like I walk among zombies. But when you are out of this "matrix", you can actually bend the rules. Because you know they're not real. They have no power over you. Like in the matrix, "there is no spoon"

Scritto da Unleasheds Wrath, 05.07.2014 at 08:24

Scritto da Columna Durruti, 05.07.2014 at 07:21

Some Lutheran cleric support same sex marriage and gay rights!
Actually, the problem is not religion, but religious fundamentalism and mafia-like "religious" institutions.

The problem IS religion. Without people holding up these false ideas, there would be no institutions or fundamnetalism.

If you want to treat a problem, don't treat the symptoms but the root cause.

Don't confuse radicalism with fundamentalism... it's good to be radical (going to the roots of the problems) but not in a dogmatic (fundamentalist) way. There is still the individual right of self-definition... the moral authority cannot be imposed, neither by the abusers of Gods name, nor by the absolute negation of this "imaginary" instance. Its all a process and be sure, we are on the same side of the barricades in this issue.

Scritto da Columna Durruti, 05.07.2014 at 09:27

the moral authority cannot be imposed, neither by the abusers of Gods name, nor by the absolute negation of this "imaginary" instance. Its all a process and be sure, we are on the same side of the barricades in this issue.

Yet it somehow still is. By parents towards their children all the time. By the time they are old enough to choose, they're already zombified. Chances are they will just continue the process. Pop up a kid and teach him the same bullshit, then that child will grow up and do the same, and so on and so forth. This is the blind photocopier of history.

If we were on the same side of the barricades, you would understand anger towards religion, and why it's actually healthy to have it.

Faith in a deity is a result of childhood indoctrination, period lol.

"I just know that God exists, I have faith."
"How do you know?"
"I just know."
"No, actually, you don't. You think you know."

Scritto da tophat, 05.07.2014 at 10:08

Faith in a deity is a result of childhood indoctrination, period lol.

"I just know that God exists, I have faith."
"How do you know?"
"I just know."
"No, actually, you don't. You think you know."

Funny thing is ...the same could be said to you too ..."you just know that god doesnt exist" ..."no you dont. You think you know"
Religious views are result of childhood OR adulthood indoctrination ...one doesnt only become religious when he is a child.
Faith in a deity or some greater meaning can be a different thing then religious view ...spiritualism can be separated from religion.
Religion is a mass fictional fantasy that is using human spiritualistic ability.
I said this before so many times ...religion or church being fiction is not a proof that some form of deity doesnt exist, this is a job for science.

First human being believing that sun is a god or that rain came from from gods was faith without indoctrination, he was wrong ...but he had faith and nobody forced that on him.

Scritto da Goblin, 05.07.2014 at 10:52

Scritto da tophat, 05.07.2014 at 10:08

Faith in a deity is a result of childhood indoctrination, period lol.

"I just know that God exists, I have faith."
"How do you know?"
"I just know."
"No, actually, you don't. You think you know."

Funny thing is ...the same could be said to you too ..."you just know that god doesnt exist" ..."no you dont. You think you know"
Religious views are result of childhood OR adulthood indoctrination ...one doesnt only become religious when he is a child.
Faith in a deity or some greater meaning can be a different thing then religious view ...spiritualism can be separated from religion.
Religion is a mass fictional fantasy that is using human spiritualistic ability.
I said this before so many times ...religion or church being fiction is not a proof that some form of deity doesnt exist, this is a job for science.

First human being believing that sun is a god or that rain came from from gods was faith without indoctrination, he was wrong ...but he had faith and nobody forced that on him.

You're good at creating false premises of others' claims and formulating your arguments.

I never said that I know that God doesn't exist. So your intervention of that is fallacious.

Clearly, I am being ostentatious when I say, "Faith in a deity is a result of childhood indoctrination, period lol.". Obviously there are other factors such as adulthood indoctrination, and the example you gave of the first humans who had faith in Gods due to natural wonders. However, those people achieved this faith by asking questions, and subsequently answering those questions.

"Faith in a deity or some greater meaning can be a different thing then religious view ...spiritualism can be separated from religion."

Yes, of course, I didn't refute this. Why are you intervening with this exemplification?

Scritto da tophat, 05.07.2014 at 11:08

You're good at creating false premises of others' claims and formulating your arguments.

Oh thank you so much ...i hope to be a laywer one day xD

Scritto da Goblin, 05.07.2014 at 10:52

Scritto da tophat, 05.07.2014 at 10:08

Faith in a deity is a result of childhood indoctrination, period lol.

"I just know that God exists, I have faith."
"How do you know?"
"I just know."
"No, actually, you don't. You think you know."

Funny thing is ...the same could be said to you too ..."you just know that god doesnt exist" ..."no you dont. You think you know"

Funny thing is ...the same could be said to you too ..."you just know that invisible pink unicorns dancing in bikinis on planet Mars don't exist" ..."no you dont. You think you know"

For the millionth time: The burden of proof is on those who claim that something exists. Stop trying to switch it to people who refuse to be crazy. They have nothing to prove. This is very basic, it is understandable that believers in god can't comprehend it tho.

Scritto da Unleasheds Wrath, 05.07.2014 at 09:35

Scritto da Columna Durruti, 05.07.2014 at 09:27

the moral authority cannot be imposed, neither by the abusers of Gods name, nor by the absolute negation of this "imaginary" instance. Its all a process and be sure, we are on the same side of the barricades in this issue.

Yet it somehow still is. By parents towards their children all the time. By the time they are old enough to choose, they're already zombified. Chances are they will just continue the process. Pop up a kid and teach him the same bullshit, then that child will grow up and do the same, and so on and so forth. This is the blind photocopier of history.

If we were on the same side of the barricades, you would understand anger towards religion, and why it's actually healthy to have it.

It depends where, why and how. It is completely different a manifestation of belief that seeks the emancipation of populations (for instance theology of liberation in Latin America and its resistance vis-à-vis the human rights violations by the military dictatorships) or a religious manifestation that seeks the implementation of rules that violate the very basic human rights... unfortunately, the latter has prevailed in history.

Burden of proof doesnt necessarily falls on the one who claims something ...there are different cases in law for example when in some cases that burden falls on the prosecutor yet in different on the defendent (not criminal law, civil law).

About the pink unicorns well yea ...but again you didnt get what i am saying. I didnt say one must debunk bible or god with a beard, thats obviously fiction, even doe fiction can be good with a nice message or bad that spawns fanatics (bible, quaran, twilight...) but i said science should prove or debunk existence of creator of universe.
Countless theories are trying already but i think that hypothaticly if creator exists, humans with our limited inteligence have as much chance of explaining or learning about the creator of the universe as a sheep has in learning and explaining mathematics.

Every religion vs athiest/agnostic debate:

''It's logical to think that God doesn't exist

''It's the other way around, it's logical to know that God does exist''

Scritto da Goblin, 05.07.2014 at 12:08

but i said science should prove or debunk existence of creator of universe.

Apparently you didn't understand anything. You say you did, but you didn't. Two points:

1. Science should prove the existence of god? Do you even realize how crazy you sound? Let me correct you: Religion should prove the existence of god. Because they are the ones who claim his existence. It's on them. Just like it's on you to prove that I stole a peach. I don't have to prove that I didn't. Still not getting it? Why don't you ask that they also prove or disprove the existence of skyghosts wearing blue pijamas? They can probably disprove it just as easily as they can disprove god: no evidence.

2. Why? Who cares? Why does the existence of a skydaddy even cross your mind? Why even think about it? It's sick. Life is the same anyway.

Another example: The tomato I ate a few minutes ago, could speak to me. YOU SHOULD HAVE SEEN IT! It was awesome. Maybe I should have video-taped it to show it to you, but that's not on me. Tophats should prove or disprove the existence of talking tomatoes. It's his responsibility. Just like science must disprove god, or else...well you get it. And remember the thief must prove his innocence, or he will get a death sentence.

Scritto da Unleasheds Wrath, 05.07.2014 at 12:26

Scritto da Goblin, 05.07.2014 at 12:08

but i said science should prove or debunk existence of creator of universe.

Apparently you didn't understand anything. You say you did, but you didn't. Two points:

1. Science should prove the existence of god? Do you even realize how crazy you sound? Let me correct you: Religion should prove the existence of god. Because they are the ones who claim his existence. It's on them. Just like it's on you to prove that I stole a peach. I don't have to prove that I didn't. Still not getting it? Why don't you ask that they also prove or disprove the existence of skyghosts wearing blue pijamas? They can probably disprove it just as easily as they can disprove god: no evidence.

2. Why? Who cares? Why does the existence of a skydaddy even cross your mind? Why even think about it? It's sick. Life is the same anyway.

I didnt mean science "should" or that science has to prove im saying science is trying to prove and science is more eligable to prove it.

And concerning your peach remark ...well that one might be right, but there are i will say again to you, cases in law when some things are considered automaticly to be true and the burden of proof is on the one who is accused.

btw. your number 2. - why are you mentioning sky daddy again? i said its fiction. Explaining universe and its creation ...well you could say again, who cares, why should we ask ourself that, but then again, why should we care about anything then anyway, who gives a fuck ...why do you have knowledge about World wars, why do you learn anything. life would be the fuckin same if you didnt know shit beside eating, taking a crap and showeling dirt somewhere to buy food and shit that food again ...would it?

Or will you now dictate in what people should be interested in and what to think? ...you hate people and institutions who do that, but you wanna take their role.

Scritto da Goblin, 05.07.2014 at 12:46

I didnt mean science "should" or that science has to prove im saying science is trying to prove and science is more eligable to prove it.

These were your exact words. I am using your words. You said "science should".

Scritto da Goblin, 05.07.2014 at 12:46

btw. your number 2. - why are you mentioning sky daddy again? i said its fiction. Explaining universe and its creation ...well you could say again, who cares, why should we ask ourself that, but then again, why should we care about anything then anyway, who gives a fuck ...why do you have knowledge about World wars, why do you learn anything. life would be the fuckin same if you didnt know shit beside eating, taking a crap and showeling dirt somewhere to buy food and shit that food again ...would it?

Nope. Practical knowledge improves life. And knowledge of history or anything else gives you a different outlook on life because you can compare how things were, are, and how they came to be this way.

The point was however, that it is your default state to not have to worry about skydaddy creators. It's insane but it doesn't seem so, because it's normalized.

Scritto da Unleasheds Wrath, 05.07.2014 at 12:56

Scritto da Goblin, 05.07.2014 at 12:46

I didnt mean science "should" or that science has to prove im saying science is trying to prove and science is more eligable to prove it.

These were your exact words. I am using your words. You said "science should".

Scritto da Goblin, 05.07.2014 at 12:46

btw. your number 2. - why are you mentioning sky daddy again? i said its fiction. Explaining universe and its creation ...well you could say again, who cares, why should we ask ourself that, but then again, why should we care about anything then anyway, who gives a fuck ...why do you have knowledge about World wars, why do you learn anything. life would be the fuckin same if you didnt know shit beside eating, taking a crap and showeling dirt somewhere to buy food and shit that food again ...would it?

Nope. Practical knowledge improves life. And knowledge of history or anything else gives you a different outlook on life because you can compare how things were, are, and how they came to be this way.

The point was however, that it is your default state to not have to worry about skydaddy creators. It's insane but it doesn't seem so, because it's normalized.

So i made a error in a sentence ...clearly i didnt intent to say science is forced to explain is there or not a deity xD

And who is worried about skydaddy or creators? ...me, im interested as im interested in alot of things. If God would come from the sky i wouldnt worship the fucker ...i would say, "well somebody has some explaining to do -.-" (not good and evil crap ...i would rather ask him wtf is this all about)